If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

GUNS!!! HUNTING!!!!!
3 days of vetting, I want to know about guns and hunting, anything?

AS far as she is concerned throw the 2nd ammendment in the trash! She ruled that states can over rule the 2nd ammendment even after the DC Supreme court ruling.
She does not believe in the constitution!!!!! Just like BUMMFACE OBUMMA!!

No desire to kill the messenger here, but please if you have legitimate sources, please cite them. I am trying to formulate an opinion based on fact, not on heresay. Your input, if indeed factual, would be appreciated by all here.

'I heard it on the news', does not constitute fact, as we all know.

The 'News' as we all know is biased.

Please, if you have some link to reversals of District Court rulings, please share them.

I provided a link in my above post. Can you not do as much?

JD

IF you are indeed interested in where she stands, Hugh, why do you not believe what she has said, or are they ALL outa context?

UB

When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

Not trying to argue the point, but this one has an interesting legal background. The Bill of Rights generally was only applied to Federal government actions. In the case pf the First Amendment, for example, the Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law....". Subsequent court decisions ruled that the same limitation applied to the Federal government as a whole, not just Congress. However, the First Amendment was not deemed to limit State action until passage of the 14th Amendment following the Civil War. With respect to the Second Amendment, the Courts have never ruled on whether or not States may regulate or restrict the right the bear arms. The Heller case had limited applicability since Washington DC is under Federal jurisdiction. If a case is ever brought based on a State legislated restriction, the Court will have to determine if the 14th Amendment extends the Federal limitation to States.

Effectively, the referenced opinion is consistent with established law in that it does not assume a limitation on State government that has never been ruled on by the Supreme Court. A ruling that the Second Amendment does in fact limit State action, in the absence of a Supreme Court decision to that effect, would have been judicial activism in that it would mean over-ruling the Legislature without established legal foundation.

Seems to me it is stare decisis that the 14th Amendment made the Bill of Rights applicable to the states. As I recall it was a case about the Exclusionary Rule that did it.

Actually not. It has been handled with separate decisions on each affected amendment and the decisions have not always gone the same way. As it happens, there has never been a case addressing the applicability of the Second Amendment to State actions and the pre-Heller decisions regarding the Second Amendment generally were inconclusive. Fortunately for all of us, there have been few State laws that had the effect of limiting gun ownership to the point of exclusion, which was the actual standard used in the Heller decision. In that context, I'm not sure either side in the gun control debate has wanted to accept the risks in pushing for a broad-ranging SCOTUS decision, particularly since many of the most conservative judges have opposed the application of the 14th Amendment to First Amendment cases, among others, as a violation of States' rights.